Olá, neste e-mail eu venho falar sobre as suas escolhas; Na vida a cada
instante você tem podido escolher o que ira fazer, e se for sábio, muitas
vezes pensa bem antes de escolher, pois sabe que uma má escolha pode trazer
péssimas consequências, pois a vida é assim, causa e efeito, ação e
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Xavier Guimard x.guim...@free.fr
* Package name: libapache-session-ldap-perl
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Xavier Guimard x.guim...@free.fr
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/~guimard/Apache-Session-LDAP-0.02/
* License :
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The second category is named error and the tags listed can not be
overridden. Those are tags corresponding to packaging errors serious
enough to mark a package unfit for the archive and should never happen.
In fact, most of the
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Wow, time goes so fast, it is already the season for attempting to delay the
release!
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
PORTUGUES-BRASIL
Olá
Eu montei uma distribuição baseada inteiramente em Debian com ambiente
gráfico KDE e os pacotes Debian, foi com um ambiente muito amigável, com
scripts automatizados para configuração e compilei um kernel com o nome da
minha distro e tudo mais.
Bem, minha pergunta é, eu
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org [091101 11:23]:
Some problems I find with this list:
I think some of those complaints show a general disagreement about
what aims Debian has. Are we here to gain for quality or is allowing
the maximum amount of (free) software the primary goal?
E: ftp-master:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: LI Daobing lidaob...@debian.org
* Package name: gemanx-gtk2
Version : 0.1.0.1
Upstream Author : Ruizhe Li lirui...@gmail.com, Henry Hu
henry.hu...@gmail.com
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/gemanx
* License : GPLv2
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 12:05:39PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org [091101 11:23]:
Some problems I find with this list:
I think some of those complaints show a general disagreement about
what aims Debian has. Are we here to gain for quality or is allowing
Hi ,
First of all check for any proprietary data you have in your system and see if
you have to include their licenses. Unless this is the case deliver the debian
package4 common-licenses with your distribution this way you can be sure that
most of the possible violation can be avoided. Also
[ please cc both me and the package team ]
Hi debian-devel
The Moodle package team is currently evaluating how to best upgrade the
existing not very well working, and out of date package.
Moodle is a webapp that works with both mysql and postgres. We currently
have a single package that
Hi Manoj,
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 01:03:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Please respect the tradition and discuss mass-filing of bugs on
debian-devel.
thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Banck wrote:
Hi Manoj,
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 01:03:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Please respect the tradition and discuss mass-filing of bugs on
Hi All,
I've stumbled upon over a year old bug #440436.
All the bugs that have been blocking this bug report have now been
resolved and the package in question has been removed from Debian.
I don't know of any reason why this bug still appears as RC bug but
since it has been over a year somebody
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package name: pudb
Version: 0.92.13
Upstream Author: Andreas Kloeckner inf...@tiker.net
URL: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pudb/
License: MIT
Description: full-screen, console-based
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The second category is named error and the tags listed can not be
overridden. Those are tags corresponding to packaging errors serious
enough to mark a package unfit for the archive and should never happen.
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:17:43AM +, Chris Lamb wrote:
Can you please consider changing the above naming?
FWIW the actual reject messages are very clear and do not use these
terms (which I've changed in Git anyway, pending merge). Thanks.
Thanks a lot for your change!
BTW, in spite of
[ Adding -qa to Cc ]
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:22:28AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
For future handling: If we are adding tags to the list that will hit
more than a few packages we will send a notice to the d-d-a list.
I don't think it's appropriate for the ftp team to add any other
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Michael Banck wrote:
Hi Manoj,
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 01:03:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Please respect the tradition and discuss mass-filing of
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
Michael Banck wrote:
Hi Manoj,
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 01:03:00PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Please respect the tradition and
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
getting around to filing bugs on policy MUST violations and others that
make the package too buggy to be in Debian
Wow, time goes so fast, it is already the season for attempting to delay the
release!
People ignoring bugs wilfully are
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
This was not a mass filing as I reaed it. Each bug was filed
after being checked individually, and was filed one by one,
manually. This was not a massive script which could have massive
numbers of false positives, and thus these
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
This was not a mass filing as I reaed it. Each bug was filed
after being checked individually, and was filed one by one,
manually. This was not a massive script which could have massive
numbers of false
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Filippo Rusconi rusconi-deb...@laposte.net
* Package name: colorcode
Version : 0.5.5
Upstream Author : Dirk Laebisch d...@laebisch.de
* URL : http://colorcode.laebisch.com/
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: C++
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
Then you probably should read Policy 7.1.1. Individual checks or
non-automation doesn't make it less massive.
Make it DevRef (thanks, Kumar).
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
This was not a mass filing as I reaed it. Each bug was filed
after being checked individually, and was filed one by one,
manually. This was not a massive script which could have massive
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
This was not a mass filing as I reaed it. Each bug was filed
after being checked individually, and was filed one by one,
manually. This was not a massive script which
Hi Manoj,
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 10:12:07AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org (01/11/2009):
This was not a mass filing as I reaed it. Each bug was filed
after being checked individually, and was
]] Peter Samuelson
(I think this discussion is getting silly, feel free to take it to
private mail.)
| | === modified file 'policy.sgml'
| | --- policy.sgml 2009-10-21 20:49:37 +
| | +++ policy.sgml 2009-10-31 00:59:18 +
| | @@ -1725,7 +1725,10 @@
| | p
| | It
On 25.10.2009 19:55, Kees Cook wrote:
Hello,
I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
uses[2]. Ubuntu has used it successfully for 1.5 years now (3 releases),
and many of the issues have already been fixed in packages that needed
adjustment[3]. After all this
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 19:53 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 25.10.2009 19:55, Kees Cook wrote:
[...]
- makes more work for dealing with warnings.
Rebuttal: those warnings are there for a reason -- they can
be real security issues, and should be fixed.
Ben Hutchings, le Sun 01 Nov 2009 19:06:59 +, a écrit :
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 19:53 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 25.10.2009 19:55, Kees Cook wrote:
[...]
- makes more work for dealing with warnings.
Rebuttal: those warnings are there for a reason -- they can
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Ben Hutchings, le Sun 01 Nov 2009 19:06:59 +, a écrit :
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 19:53 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
there are some functions in glibc which are questionably declared with
the warn
about unused result
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Angel Abad angela...@gmail.com
* Package name: Blazeblogger
Version : 1.0.p
Upstream Author : Jaromir Hradilek jhradi...@gmail.com
* URL : http://blaze.blackened.cz/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Perl
Description
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
Some problems I find with this list:
E: ftp-master: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid
N:
N: The user or group ID of the owner of the file is invalid. The owner
N: user and group IDs must be in the set of globally allocated IDs,
N: because other IDs
Luk Claes l...@debian.org writes:
As before Manoj seems to interpret things and word things so they fit
the way he can use them at the moment he needs them. As long as that
continues I'm not going to even try to get the Debian Policy and RC bug
policy consistent and the Debian Policy will
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector hector.o...@gmail.com
* Package name: linux-armel
Version : 2.6.30
Upstream Author : many individuals
* URL : http://kernel.org/
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: C
Description : Linux support headers
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:10:44PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
In general you cannot rely on checking errno because it is not defined
whether a successful operation clears it.
But you can clear it by hand before calling them.
That's only true in some special cases; for example, SuSv3
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector hector.o...@gmail.com
* Package name: binutils-armel
Version : 2.20
Upstream Author : many people
* URL : http://sourceware.org/binutils
* License : GPLv2
Programming Lang: C
Description : The GNU binary
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector Oron hector.o...@gmail.com
* Package name: eglibc-armel
Version : 2.10
Upstream Author : many authors
* URL : http://www.eglibc.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : GNU C Library: Shared
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector hector.o...@gmail.com
* Package name: gcc-4.4-armel
Version : 4.4
Upstream Author : many authors
* URL : http://gcc.gnu.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : The GNU C compiler (for
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector Oron hector.oron+nos...@gmail.com
* Package name: gcc-4.3-armel
Version : 4.3
Upstream Author : many authors
* URL : http://gcc.gnu.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : The GNU C compiler
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hector hector.o...@gmail.com
* Package name: gdb-armel
Version : 7.0
Upstream Author : many authors
* URL : http://sourceware.org/gdb
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : The GNU Debugger (for
Luk Claes l...@debian.org writes:
As before Manoj seems to interpret things and word things so they fit
the way he can use them at the moment he needs them.
Even if that were true, it's foolish to think this is a trait specific
to one person. Everyone does this to some degree, and smearing one
Hello,
I would like to do a little explanation on the ITP I have filled for
{linux,binutils,eglibc,gcc-4.3,gcc-4.4,gdb}-armel.
These set of packages provide a cross toolchain for armel targets to
be built on i386 and amd64 platforms (maybe ppc could be added)
In order to avoid code
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:34:37PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Luk Claes l...@debian.org writes:
As before Manoj seems to interpret things and word things so they fit
the way he can use them at the moment he needs them. As long as that
continues I'm not going to even try to get the Debian
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:34:37PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
On behalf of the other four Policy maintainers who aren't Manoj and who
so far as I know you don't have personal conflicts with, let me just
say gee, thanks. This is how we can ensure that
Hi,
On Sonntag, 1. November 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think it's a very positive step forward for the archive as a
whole to start doing auto-rejects for some major Lintian tags,
I only agree partially. IMO auto-rejects for _introducing_ certain lintian
tags (in sid/exp) is right as it is
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 23:14 +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
Hello,
I would like to do a little explanation on the ITP I have filled for
{linux,binutils,eglibc,gcc-4.3,gcc-4.4,gdb}-armel.
These set of packages provide a cross toolchain for armel targets to
be built on i386 and amd64
Le Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
People ignoring bugs wilfully are possibly to blame, don't you think?
So blame them. But as for reporting a large number of RC bugs, it has been
shown in the previous release cycles that putting this in the frame of
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:31:08PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
Some problems I find with this list:
E: ftp-master: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid
Policy 9.2 does /not/ prohibit shipping files with owners outside these
ranges; it prohibits relying on
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:31:19PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
All Manoj is doing is filing bugs. Anyone can do that. I don't see any
reason why that would make anything harder in the long run.
I have seen him assert in a bug on one package that I'm subscribed to that
the package has been
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 12:50:19AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
And yet, some FHS violations just seem to be treated as important (#523920),
while others are more than serious (not being able to upload with some FHS
violations, which IMO have less consequences...)
Bug #523920 is not an FHS
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Wow, time goes so fast, it is already the season for attempting to delay the
release!
People ignoring bugs wilfully are possibly to blame, don't you think?
And that justifies forcing these people to move your pet
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 03:31:12PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:22:28AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
For future handling: If we are adding tags to the list that will hit
more than a few packages we will send a notice to the d-d-a list.
I don't think it's
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:31:19PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
All Manoj is doing is filing bugs. Anyone can do that. I don't see any
reason why that would make anything harder in the long run.
I have seen him assert in a bug on one package that I'm
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 03:09:56PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
E: ftp-master: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid
N:
N: The user or group ID of the owner of the file is invalid. The owner
N: user and group IDs must be in the set of globally allocated IDs,
N: because other IDs are dynamically
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 15:55 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Seems to me like there's no point in asking the ftpmasters to come
up with
the source package section name because the package author didn't
notice
and set one before the first upload. Although I do agree that if
we're
going to
On 02.11.2009 00:00, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 23:14 +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
Hello,
I would like to do a little explanation on the ITP I have filled for
{linux,binutils,eglibc,gcc-4.3,gcc-4.4,gdb}-armel.
These set of packages provide a cross toolchain for armel
Le Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 04:17:15PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
I'm not unsympathetic, but I personally don't mind the ftp team being
somewhat more proactive than that. A lot of the bugs that they've marked
as rejects are pretty obvious and easy-to-fix bugs, and I'm not sure why
the
Penny Leach wrote:
[...]
I think the best way to handle this, is stop having a moodle package at
all, but instead have a moodle-common package, that depends on either
moodle-mysql and moodle-pgsql. These two obviously depend on
moodle-common, and conflict with each other, and all three new
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:31:19PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
All Manoj is doing is filing bugs. Anyone can do that. I don't see any
reason why that would make anything harder in the long run.
I have seen him assert in a bug on one package that
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 12:05:39PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org [091101 11:23]:
Some problems I find with this list:
I think some of those complaints show a general disagreement about
what aims Debian has. Are we here to gain for quality or is allowing
Steve Langasek wrote:
And I objected before when this was first proposed that the ftp team should
not be auto-rejecting from the archive for any issues that are not
violations of Policy must requirements.
The right process is: discuss; reach a consensus; amend Policy; enforce
Policy.
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
People ignoring bugs wilfully are possibly to blame, don't you think?
So blame them. But as for reporting a large number of RC bugs, it has
If there are a large
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Wow, time goes so fast, it is already the season for attempting to delay
the
release!
People ignoring bugs wilfully are possibly to blame, don't you think?
And that
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 02.11.2009 00:00, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 23:14 +0100, Hector Oron wrote:
Hello,
I would like to do a little explanation on the ITP I have filled for
{linux,binutils,eglibc,gcc-4.3,gcc-4.4,gdb}-armel.
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 07:54:52PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Well, just like the release team apparently has the right to
arbitrarily overrule policy and decide when serious bugs are not
serious -- as opposed to not RC -- yup.
I do think that the ftp team decides what
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 10:12:11PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
(N.B.: this check would fail even in the case of a package with a
pre-existing section override in the archive. What's the sense of
that?
Let the maintainer get the nag mail after the fact telling them to
reconcile
the
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
And that justifies forcing these people to move your pet cosmetic
issues to the top of their todo list?
Not my pet cosmetic issue. This is a decision taken by folks
in charge of the archive
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 04:17:15PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
I'm not unsympathetic, but I personally don't mind the ftp team being
somewhat more proactive than that. A lot of the bugs that they've
marked as rejects are pretty obvious and
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 07:54:52PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Well, just like the release team apparently has the right to
arbitrarily overrule policy and decide when serious bugs are not
serious -- as opposed to not RC -- yup.
Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org writes:
lintian already categorizes the bugs into “errors” and “warnings”. I'd
personally prefer it if the ftp-master team didn't choose to hand-pick
lintian tags themselves but trusted lintian and its maintainers.
Possibly also by filling bugs to lintian
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
- it provides a hint to the ftp team about the section it might belong in
- it gives us a way to see when the ftp team and the maintainer disagree
about the correct section (reminder mails to the maintainer on override
mismatch)
- it gives
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
And that justifies forcing these people to move your pet cosmetic
issues to the top of their todo list?
Not my pet cosmetic issue. This is a decision
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
who spent over 30 hours checking for and filing 219 bugs against packages
which violate policy, and is getting somewhat irritated by all the
kvetching
Thank you for doing this. I've looked at doing it from time to time based
on Lintian results
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:56:13PM +, Rafal Czlonka wrote:
Hi All,
I've stumbled upon over a year old bug #440436.
All the bugs that have been blocking this bug report have now been
resolved and the package in question has been removed from Debian.
I don't know of any reason why this bug
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 07:29:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Also, note that the ftp team are at least project delegates, whereas the
Lintian maintainers are just package maintainers. If we have a
governance problem with the ftp team making this decision, it would be
even worse if the
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: fvwm
Version: 1:2.5.28.ds-2
Severity: important
User: d...@debian.org
Usertags: readline6
Sent to http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/09/msg00549.html
As a package maintainer you got this email directly as well.
Fine,
these profile which kids who is missing, kindly forward to others
for help these kids and presnts
usha
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kids Missing kidsmiss...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Subject: [Kids Missing:/] Kids Missing Alert - 01 November 2009
To:
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 08:01:20PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
First of all, why do you want to split moodle? there's for example phpbb3
which uses dbconfig and allows multiple different DBMS as backends.
Fair question. There's also quite a few packages that depend on
dbconfig-common
Le Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:35:58AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
The interface definition behind this is:
That ‘make -f debian/rules’ is not present anywhere in the Policy demonstrates
it is not the interface.
[...]
For the sake of completeness: Policy states that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:58:51 +0100
Source: dwm-tools
Binary: dwm-tools
Architecture: source i386
Version: 31-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Suckless Maintainers suckl...@lists.debian-maintainers.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:19:25 +0100
Source: extlib
Binary: libextlib-ocaml-dev libextlib-ocaml
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.5.1-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:42:33 +0100
Source: gnu-fdisk
Binary: gnu-fdisk
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.2.3-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Parted Maintainer Team parted-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:29:38 -0400
Source: ikiwiki
Binary: ikiwiki
Architecture: source all
Version: 3.20091031
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Joey Hess jo...@debian.org
Changed-By: Joey Hess jo...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:50:00 +0100
Source: json-wheel
Binary: libjson-wheel-ocaml-dev
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.0.6-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:05:26 +0200
Source: ledit
Binary: ledit libledit-ocaml-dev
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 2.01-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:19:02 -0700
Source: libibverbs
Binary: libibverbs1 libibverbs-dev libibverbs1-dbg ibverbs-utils
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.1.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Roland Dreier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:18:05 -0500
Source: liquidsoap
Binary: liquidsoap liguidsoap
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 0.9.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:44:44 -0400
Source: makeztxt
Binary: makeztxt
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.62-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group packa...@qa.debian.org
Changed-By: Barry deFreese
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 07:19:14 +0100
Source: mlton
Binary: mlton
Architecture: source i386
Version: 20091029
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Wesley W. Terpstra (Debian) terps...@debian.org
Changed-By: Wesley W. Terpstra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:29:26 +0800
Source: mpg123-el
Binary: mpg123-el
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:1.52-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: LI Daobing lidaob...@debian.org
Changed-By: LI Daobing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:28:40 +0100
Source: mysql-ocaml
Binary: libmysql-ocaml libmysql-ocaml-dev
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.0.4-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:55:20 -0400
Source: nn
Binary: nn
Architecture: source i386
Version: 6.7.3-2.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Cord Beermann c...@debian.org
Changed-By: Barry deFreese bdefre...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:58:31 +0100
Source: ocaml-res
Binary: libres-ocaml-dev
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 3.2.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers debian-ocaml-ma...@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:27:00 +0100
Source: packeth
Binary: packeth
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.6.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: d.pale...@gmail.com
Changed-By: David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com
Description:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:07:44 +0100
Source: parallelpython
Binary: python-pp
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.5.7-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Python Modules Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:23:05 +
Source: postgresql-autodoc
Binary: postgresql-autodoc
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.40-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Tim Retout t...@retout.co.uk
Changed-By: Tim Retout
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 18:01:40 +1100
Source: pspresent
Binary: pspresent
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.3-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Jamie Wilkinson j...@debian.org
Changed-By: Jamie Wilkinson j...@debian.org
1 - 100 of 221 matches
Mail list logo
